ARBITRATION COURT.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1898, 5 November 1913, Page 8

ARBITRATION COURT.

DEATH. IN HORSE RACE.

JOCKEYS' INDUSTRIAL STATUS,

What was described as , "a unique case" was heard yesterday at the Arbitration Court, bei'oro Mr. Justice Sim and two assessors, Mr. W. A. Scott (representing tho Employers'' Federation) aiid Mr. M'Cullough. This was a case in. which Mary Ann M'lntosh, married woman, Lower Hutt, sued William Ernest Hughes, patent agent, Lower Hutt, from whom she claimed compensation for tho death of her son (19), on whom slio was partly dependent for support. Mr. Wilford' appeared for tho applicant, and' Mr- A. W. Blair represented respondent. Mr. Wilford, in opening the case on behalf of Mrs. Mary Ann M'lntosh, said tho case was a very queer one, and would probably bo unique in the Arbitration Court of any country. Plaintiff was the mother of a boy (Harold Vivian M'lntosh), now deceased, who on November '21 last was employed by Mr. Hughes to ride a racing mare, called Biddy, at a race at Blenheim. While riding tho mare was tripped, and fell, the boy w;as thrown from his saddle on to his head, was taken to the hospital, and died on December 6. Plaintiff had been separated from her husband for seyon years, since when ho had been to prison severab-'times for refusing to maintain hey Tho boy was apprenticed with Mr. Pritchard, a public racing trainer, who Was training tho mare for defendant. Under tho agreement, he was to receive ss. a week and tho foes for winning and losing races, tho latter being paid to his mother. From October 12, 1911, to November 21, 1912, his fees amounted to £55, which his mother received. Under tlio rules of racing thqro was a minimum fco of £2 for the rider of every losing mount, and the Jockey Club insisted upon that being paid beforo the race. Plaintiff (the boy's mothor) worked by-tho day, had no separato means or ability, received nothing from her husband, but had great possibilities as far as tho boywas concerned. He was an exceptionally brilliant boy, and a light-weight, who was a good rider, and after serving his apprenticeship could cam retention fees up to hundreds a-year. Mr. Pritchard would, tell them that ho was undoubtedly a bi-ight bclv with a future: What the mother had lost it was impossible to say, but they claimed under Sub-Clause 3, Clauso 4, of tho Worknten's Compensation Act, such compensation as was reasonable and proportionate to the injury to the dependants. There were some interesting legal points raised by tho defenco, who contended that oven if the boy Was killed whilst riding for Mr. Hughes, the accident arose during tho performance of a contract with tlio trainer and not with tho owner. Mr. Wilford reiterated that the boy would havo had a big future beforo him.

Mr. Blair objected to this statement as not being relevant, adding that the boy "might havo gone to England and earned thousands a year."

Mr. Wilfcrd replied that he was prepared to nctept that admission. Mr. Blair added that what lxo nio&nt

was that they could not deal with possibilities. The boy flight havo earned thousands a year, and Mr. Wilford might becomo Premier of New Zealand/ Mr. 'Wilford did not accept this admission. | Charles Pritchard stated ho had trained Biddy for defendant at £2 2s. a week. Young M'lutosh was "a good boy with a future," and lie (witness) could only say that of one in twenty or thirty boys, livery owner paid £1 insurance for every horse ho had racing, and £400 was paid in easo of death by accident, but Mr. Hughes had failed to pay this premium. The bov had ridden previously for Mr. Huglies, who asked him to ride on this occasion.

William Ernest Hughes, patent agent, 6tated that he had four thoroughbreds for racing. Biddy was running in his name on the day tho boy was killed, hut he (defendant) did not'select the boy to ride, though he consented to him doing so on his trainer's recommendation. His fee of £1 had been paid, but tho conference had decided that it was not paid in time, though tho matter was still being argued, and tho conference may yet pay tho £400.

To Mr. Blair: Ho had been racing for ten years, during which time he had lost several thousand pounds. Since this fatality ho had put his horsoß out to graze, and had not raced.

Archibald Black, agent for A. 0. Kennedy, and custodian for the Hutt Club, said that ho took a great interest in that claim, and, but for him, Mrs. M'lntosh could not have pursued it. Plaintiff, in her evidence, said that she brought divorce proceedings against her husband, against whom she alleged misconduct, hut lost her caso. Slits got a .Magistrate's order for maintenance seven years ago, hut during the first twelve months her husband was in prison for seven months for disobeying this order, and for tho last six years sho had not received a penny from him. This boy had been a great help to her, as she got all his foes.

To Mr. Blair: She had two other boys, aged 21 and 19, each of whom'paid holloa. The house she lived in waa lier own, and was worth £GSO, but there was a mortgage of £450 on it. Mr. Blair, on behalf of defendant, said that was the first case ho had hoard of in whiclf the owner was sued in caso of an accident. This boy had ridden for Mr. Hughes in only three races, and was thus employed on his bohalf for about three-quarters of an hour. A jockey's, employment was A profession, and he was not a worker under tho Compensation Act. That case was unique, inasmuch as no one had ever claimed that a jockey was a worker. Owners, as a rule, ran their horses for sport and amusement;

Mr. Wilford: I don't admit that; it has not been my experience. His Honour: Was n6t a professional footballer held to he a worker?

Mr. Blair replied that t'lio footballer was employed by a weekly engagement. Mr. Wilford submitted that tho Act laid down that any person was a worker who entered into work by a contract of service with an employer, and a jockey entered into such a contract. It was ijecessary that there should bo a contract 'before tho position of a / worker could arise. Judgment was reserved. Disputes settled by Conciliation.

In threo eases, tho Wellington painters, the Wellington hairdressers, and the marine engineers, it was reported that the disputes had been settled by tho Conciliation Council.

Application was made for exemption of the Union Steam Ship Company and tho Wellington City Council from the award, and Mr. Grenfell (employers' representative) said that exemptions Isad been granted to several concerns of a similar naturo by tho Conciliation Council. Tho union representative asked that tho award bo extended to.tako in Pnc-knkariki. "The Court reserved - its decision.

The hairdressers' agreement was received from the Conciliation Council, and a few matters of detail wero reserved for consideration..

In the case of the marine engineers' dispute, it was announced that a settlement,had been arrived at by the Conciliation Council.'

In tl'ie matter of the boot trade award an application was made to add to the parties, to tho award a manufacturer of heels and under-soles. The question was held over pending tho production of evidence.

Hie Court also liad before it a case stated, Carpenters' TJnion v. Fullor, which was previously before tho late. Dr. M'Arihtir, S.M., and the hearing of legal argument was postponed. Deserting Husband's Death. Th'e Public Trustee represented Mrs. Taylor and her two children, living in Scotland, in a claim for £292 10s., compensation against Albert E. Dent; for the death of John Taylor, farm labourer, iato of Domett, Canterbury, who was drowned in,the Hurunui River in January, IDJLI, while employed as a labourer by defendant. ' Mr, J. W. M'Donald, solicitor for the Public Trustee, wlio is tho administrator of deceased's estate, said that tho latter left a widow and four children (two under 21 years of age), and lie was maintaining them for some two years, the timo he left Scotland till his 'death. Mr, M'Donald read tho evidence of the-widow, Jessie Gregor Taylor, of Kinmuck, Moorurie, Scotland, which showed thero had been some domestic differences, but Mr. M'Donald submitted that thero had been lio' abandonment of tho children, and that doceased's absence might have been intended to bo temporary. Ho asked the Court to treat the caso rf tho widow and infants as ono of total dependency. Mr. M. Myers, on behalf of defendant, said there was a decree of the Court against tho deceased for maintenance, and-his whereabouts were not' discovered until his death. Judgment was reserved. Labourers or Carpenters. Sir. R. T. Bailey, Inspector of Awards, appealed from tho decision of Mr. liiddell, S.M., in his case against the Wellington City Corporation under tho provisions of tho Carpenters' and Jcinors' Award. Tho Magistrate -held that the work dono by labourers engaged as tirnbermen at Kaiwarra was not carpenters' work. It appeared that tho Corporation were erocting a septic tank at Kaiwarra, which will drain the whole watershed of the Kaiwarra stream, including Northlands and Karori. Tho Corporation employed several plumbers and carpenters, but labcurors were engaged in the studding and boxing. Mr. Bailey pointed out that the building tnulo had been revolutionised by tho introduction of reinforced concrete-work, and it had been tho practice with builders to employ carpenters on the orection of boxing in concrete work. That was an important matter to the Carpenters' Union, as the biggest portion of their 'fork was carried nut in that way.

_ Mr. O'Slioa, 011 liclialf of tho Corporation, said that whether it was necessary to employ a carpenter or not had to ho deckled in eacli case, and where necessary t'he Corporation had employed them. The engineer had always employed carpenters where greater _accurncv was required, but in constructing the other scptic tanks ho bfttl employed timbermeli, '

Judgment was reserved, and the Conrt. adjourned until 10 o'clock this morning. Cases to Follow.

The following fixtures were made in rcspect of the other compensation actions:—Botfield v. Da vies, two o'clock this afternoon; Owens v, Shaw, Sarill, and Albion Company, to follow; and Croniii v. Wellington Board, J.O o'clock to-morrow.